A doctor who persuaded the U.S. Supreme Court to demand stronger proof of intentional misconduct in prosecutions of opioid prescribers is seeking a sequel to his triumph last year, accusing federal appeals courts of widely flouting the demand and effectively allowing regulators to invent felony offenses.
As the U.S. Supreme Court answered one pressing question about the False Claims Act's scienter requirement Thursday, it raised a new issue about what counts as a "substantial and unjustifiable risk" that a claim for payment is false, experts said.
A high-profile warning from the federal government's top doctor about social media harming America's youth echoes core components of sprawling litigation targeting Facebook, Instagram, TikTok and other platforms, including a controversial theory that could substantially broaden the boundaries of personal injury law.
When sophisticated drug and device companies have confronted deadly diseases and daunting approval standards, they've hired the brightest scientific and legal minds or bribed prescribers with cash, liquor, steaks, vacations and lap dances. The latter approach undergirds a landmark law that has been fueling litigation for 50 years and enters its next half-century chasing a new generation of camouflaged kickbacks.
False Claims Act litigation targeting health care kickbacks has taken an especially expensive toll on corporate America because top-dollar defense attorneys spurn settlements despite "damning evidence," former U.S. Department of Justice lawyers who now represent FCA whistleblowers told Law360.